Mohammad Image- Every Paper Should Print It
The Muslims are rioting, by God they're always rioting about something. The most recent cause celebre is beyond stupid. They're upset that Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published some cartoons that lampooned the Prophet Mohammed, the founder of the famous " Religion of Peace ".
Islamic tradition -- but only tradition, not the Koran -- says that its forbidden to show images of the Prophet.
Well, earth to Islam :tough noogies. In any newspaper, I can see images lampooning the Pope, the President, historical figures, people now alive who are precious to any. In the Arab media, there is a constant parade of anti-Jewish cartoons, showing rabbis as cannibals and murderers. Below, a fat yarmulke-wearing Ariel Sharon sets the world, and the dove of peace, on fire.
If its ok to lampoon people you don't like, its OK for all of us to post images lampooning your big time holy guy.
Phantom,
What do you think of the official position of the US Dept. of State on the cartoon question?
Posted by
Alan |
February 03, 2006 11:19 PM
The Department of State, as it so often is, speaks the language of "Diplo-weenie."
Perhaps the cause of truth and justice would have been better served if State simply had kept quiet.
This controversy is serving a useful purpose. The Islamic hard-liners are being seen for what they are: anti-freedom and dangerous. They don't want to have a point of view in the arena of ideas, they want to own the arena.
Good post.
Posted by
Dave the Oklahomilist |
February 04, 2006 12:44 AM
Well, I think that the Department of State is wrong.
You either have freedom of speech or you don't.
You either have freedom criticize or draw caricatures or you do not. What if I think that GW Bush is as sacred to me as this desert Prophet fella is to them? Do I have the right to protest and attack an Arab embassy if Al Jazeera or the " Arab News " newspaper draws a picture of GW that I don't like?
This practice of not showing his image does not come from the Koran anyway. It comes from tradition. Well, screw the tradition. Where did I sign up to adhere to such nonsense?
I don't find it offensive. I find it proper and good to draw caricatures of anyone.
Posted by
The Phantom |
February 04, 2006 11:32 AM
Well I don't think anybody with any sense is calling for freedom of speech to be curtailed and although I think the cartoon is gratuitously offensive, I would say the reaction by some Muslims has been way over the top.
Of all Muslims worldwide though, what percentage would you say burnt flags/stormed embassies etc.? I'd bet less than 1% which would make it an extremely small minority.
A fact that hasn't been reported much is that there have been counter-demonstrations by Muslims in some countries calling for a less angry response and accepting freedom of speech.
With any freedom comes responsibility though and I don't think this cartoon is meant to be funny/satirical, just insulting.
Posted by
JG |
February 05, 2006 8:06 PM
JG
But I see insulting images and references to Christianity every month here in NYC. Listen to any avant-garde comedian asshole. Go to the major art galleries with an exhibition on new artists ( the Brooklyn Museum of the Virgin Mary smeared by elephant dung a few years ago comes to mind. )
The media in Moslem countries is --inundated--by anti-Jewish images and stories.
So why is this ok, and why is it so terrible for their prophet to be mocked a little also?
Plus, it sure looks like the greatest anger--caused by images of Mohammad with a pigface --has been caused by a hoax. By images that the Danish paper never printed.
See this
Posted by
The Phantom |
February 07, 2006 11:54 PM